This is not a forum
Please do not use talk pages such as Virgin Killer for general discussion of the topic. They are for discussion related to improving the article. They are not to be used as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
I just want people to know that picture is child porn. The FBI is looking at it as a crime. I just wanted to let people know. I am sorry if I cause any problems.
- It has never been ruled as child porn by any court anywhere. The image has been widely available since the 1970s. You have not provided any substantiation for your allegations. Also, see WP:NOTCENSORED, Wikipedia is not censored because you might be offended. Please cease your modification of other people's relevant comments on article talk pages. ~Amatulić (talk) 05:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Talk page vandalism
- Why do you think it is not child porn? There is a naked girl there. Sounds like child porn to me.
Let's chat. Why do you think I am vandalize?
User:Amatulic do you know what child porn is?
- Yes, I do. Do you? No court agrees with your apparent definition. Do you know what vandalism is?
What is child porn then? I think talking to you be a lot easier. Could you please give me your number so we can work this problem out or do you want me to get you my number? Thanks.
- There is no problem to work out, and honestly, I see no point in continuing this discussion. You have made allegations but you have not substantiated them. You have disrupted Wikipedia without first learning the basic policies and guidelines. Bottom line, that particular image is not child porn. You may disagree, but your personal opinion isn't the legal opinion, and isn't the consensus opinion on Wikipedia. If you want to learn more about the history of that image on Wikipedia read the discussion archives on Talk:Virgin Killer for starters. ~Amatulić (talk) 06:01, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
One last question, why do you want to be part of the solution or part of the problem?
You keep removing comments from the talk page. That's vandalism, unless it was done mistakenly. Since you keep reverting people who replace the deleted comments, it seems to be intentional. Please stop, or you will be blocked. Equazcion (talk) 05:50, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC)
- Equazcion Do you know what child porn is?
Will you remove the child porn or not?
- If you mean the image in the article, no, it won't be removed, at least not on your authority. The issue has been discussed at length before, and it's been decided that the image does not constitute child pornography. You're free to comment on the issue on the talk page, but removing people's comments won't convince anyone to do what you want. Equazcion (talk) 06:07, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC)
"In the wake of WND news coverage, the FBI is now reviewing a Wikipedia photo of a nude adolescent that could violate federal child-pornography laws."
- Compared to WND, the National Inquirer is a "reliable source". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 13:22, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:GodBlessOurTroops. Thank you. Equazcion (talk) 05:55, 14 Mar 2010 (UTC)